Veto Disappoints L.A. Community College Officials

Gov. Gray Davis on Monday vetoed a bill that could have provided hundreds of millions of dollars to refurbish aging buildings in the Los Angeles Community College District, bitterly disappointing district leaders who had hoped the measure would reverse years of creeping decline at their nine campuses.

Kelly Candaele, president of the Los Angeles board of trustees, called the veto “a very disappointing message.”

“It was certainly clear that our district . . . has not been getting its fair share,” he said.

“Major, major disappointment,” echoed Los Angeles trustee Georgia Mercer. “I know we are just not on the radar screen of the governor or the Legislature this year.”

A spokesman for the governor did not respond to a request for comment. Senate Bill 1283, sponsored by Richard Polanco (D-Los Angeles), was the district’s top legislative priority for this year.

It sought to change what Los Angeles officials maintain is a long-standing inequity in the way the state divides the proceeds from statewide bond measures. The formulas tend to favor growing suburban and rural districts over urban ones where enrollment is stagnant.

Los Angeles officials argue that, in favoring new building projects over renovations, the state has been pitting the suburbs against the cities in a rigged contest.

The losers, they say, have inevitably been poorer, inner-city college students who must attend school in shabby buildings without the benefit of up-to-date amenities.

At Valley College for example, students sit in portable classes so old that the floors are slowly sinking. Louvered windows--the type popular in the 1950s--mean air conditioners work less efficiently.

Polanco’s bill would have set aside some portion of bond funds for so-called modernization projects in older districts, probably at the expense of new projects elsewhere.

“It was a chance to level the playing field,” said Los Angeles Chancellor Marshall Drummond, “to say kids in the cities are just as deserving as kids in the suburbs.”

But to other districts, particularly those that benefit from the status quo, the bill seemed like an attempt by Los Angeles to siphon dollars from a limited pot. As it is, barely half of the annual backlog of projects are funded each year.

Money for new facilities “typically comes five years behind when you need it,” said Nicolas Ferguson, vice president of administrative services for the Santa Clarita Community College District, where enrollment is expected to grow nearly 23% this year, far faster than in Los Angeles.

“We are using offices and all kinds of crazy places just to house students,” Ferguson said. “The bottom line is that it’s not a fair system because there is not enough money to fill everyone’s needs.”

The bill was opposed by the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges and by state Chancellor Thomas Nussbaum.

In the heated lobbying battle over the bill, Nussbaum’s staff criticized Los Angeles officials for failing to submit applications and spend money in a timely way. On Monday, Nussbaum faulted district leaders for seeking lawmakers’ help before giving processes within the state college system a chance to work.

“We have to balance the interests of all the districts,” Nussbaum said. “There are 72 districts in the state. There isn’t just one.”

Los Angeles district leaders said they will continue efforts to get more funds.

*

Times staff writer Solomon Moore contributed to this report.